The State v. Jodi Arias: break in trial until 28 January 2013 #19 *ADULT CONTENT*

[TotallyObsessed]

Agreed - seems like the only true character witness for JA would be her mother. Bet they won't call her either!

JVM dug up some old friend from high school last night. She was gushing about what a sweet, NORMAL, girl JA was.

My only question was "Why aren't you slated to testify on her behalf if you know so much?"

 

[CUCKOOHEAD]

I had never noticed that about Travis before until Mike Brooks said something about it last week. He mentioned that eyebrow thing he does in a lot of pics with his lips pursed, and said that was about as close to a smile as he had seen.

So I started looking and doggone if he wasn't right. It's hard to find a smiley one!

I wonder if he had braces as a kid. Sometimes you get in the habit of not showing your teeth even when they come off. :waitasec:

There are photos and videos of Travis grinning broadly. I think it has to do with who else was around. Dancing and hugging other women (like pals) he is smiling. The PPL meeting with Travis he was very upbeat and smiling.

 

[Pensfan]

There's a domestic violence expert who will testify for the defense, her name is Alyce Laviolette, she also believes Snow White was a domestic violence victim.

They might have a computer forensics expert testify, perhaps about the phone sex recording JA made.

Maybe another Defense Psychologist who will seemingly attack Travis as a sexual deviant. Dr Richard Samuels, here's his website: http://svpexpertwitness.com/evaluations.asp

I'm having flashbacks of Dr Sally Karioth. This should be funny. :looking for popcorn and popcorn bowl:

Q: "Have you been published in any journals?"
A: "Yes, in Reader's Digest."
Q: :holding back a snicker: "Have you been published in any professional journals?"

 

[Curious Me]

These jurors won't be swallowing the kool aid about Snow White. I'm thinking defense can go home, and let the jurors just keep asking their excellent questions.

 

[Quester]

Snow White, you mean the REAL Snow White? lol

No, the FAKE one. :lol:

 

[Karmady]

The more I hear, the more I think Jodi might take the stand. I would have said no way ever at first (in fact, I might have actually said that lol), but now I'm starting to think there's the slightest chance. If the defense case doesn't get any better, I'm thinking that will be their only choice. Plus, I honestly don't think the defense team cares enough to do more than tell her not to. jmo

 

[CUCKOOHEAD]

Last night on NG (I think) I believe it was Lisa Bloom or Stacy Honowitz who said that the defense attorney COULD NOT put Jodi on the stand because it would be suborning perjury. In other words, that attorney knows that Jodi is going to lie. (Also the reason Casey Anthony didn’t testify probably - but I digress). But they did say that if a defendant ABSOLUTELY INSISTS on testifying, the defense attorney will just put them up on the stand and let them talk, tell their story, but that the attorney will sit down and not ask any questions.

Boy howdy won’t THAT be fun if it happens?!!!!

I'd be glued to my seat for that story. :fence:

 

[Wishbone]

I know of not a single case in which a defendant has been sentenced to a lesser crime, acquitted, or received a lesser sentence for verbal or emotional abuse alone.

Every case I am familiar with has contained aspects of physical violence as well. There are still many, many people though who believe unless one is being physically injured there is no abuse. Many laws do nothing to protect those trapped in an emotional or psychologically abusive relationship either. (Though this is changing. A few European countries have recently passed legislation specifically criminalising psychological abuse. :great

This is all just FWIW. Little makes me more enraged than when someone claims domestic violence whose actions are so contrary to having lived through that experience. :furious:

I don't know if Betty Broderick was charged with a lesser crime or what happened, but she was convicted of two counts of 2nd degree murder for killing her ex and his new wife. She told quite a tale of woe that didn't include physical violence if I remember correctly.

 

[m00c0w]

Is this the same for left handed and right handed people?

Yes. It's based off of the difference between the left and right brain hemispheres.

 

[LinasK]

Ummm, Jean is of Hispanic descent, and I think she knows Spanish, she went into Joran VanDerSloot's prison in Peru.

She's pronouncing Juan's name with a Spanish pronunciation "Huan" and rolling her r on Martinez. Casares is also a Hispanic surname.

 

[LotusPawprint]

I know of not a single case in which a defendant has been sentenced to a lesser crime, acquitted, or received a lesser sentence for verbal or emotional abuse alone.

Every case I am familiar with has contained aspects of physical violence as well. There are still many, many people though who believe unless one is being physically injured there is no abuse. Many laws do nothing to protect those trapped in an emotional or psychologically abusive relationship either. (Though this is changing. A few European countries have recently passed legislation specifically criminalising psychological abuse. :great

This is all just FWIW. Little makes me more enraged than when someone claims domestic violence whose actions are so contrary to having lived through that experience. :furious:

I certainly don't want to minimize the impact verbal or emotional abuse can have on a victim and I've seen the damage it does. In legitimate cases it's a monster on its own but I've seen nothing whatsoever to substantiate that's true in this case.

Like you said I get very upset when this is misused and It just does a huge injustice to real situations of verbal/emotional abuse when defenses like this muddy the waters.


Also, last night someone posted the AZ statute regarding self defense (justifiable homicide) and iirc it specified that being verbally threatened was NOT grounds for an individual to react with a physically violent response. If anyone can find that easily I'd love to see that again. TIA!

 

[oceanblueeyes]

I am appalled that Jean would actually hold it against an attorney if they are passionate and aggressive or if it is not a style she likes. Lets hope to hell she never sits on a jury.:eyeroll: She would vote with her emotions and biases instead of basing it on the evidence entered.:furious:

How totally immature.

IMO

 

[TotallyObsessed]

I don't know if Betty Broderick was charged with a lesser crime or what happened, but she was convicted of two counts of 2nd degree murder for killing her ex and his new wife. She told quite a tale of woe that didn't include physical violence if I remember correctly.

I just said that on twitter the other day. If JA is found NG.....Betty Broderick needs a do over ASAP.

 

[Mormon Attorney]

Thanks for answering questions about your faith. Can a woman go to heaven alone, without a husband taking her?

In the Mormon faith, we believe marriage is one of the most sacred, eternal ordinances. The man can't go without the woman and the woman can't go without the man. It's not one or the other - both.

Having said that, there are many circumstances where someone dies unmarried. That does not mean that they cannot go to heaven. For instance, I had a child die at birth. She is automatically there.

Also, there are times where one spouse is faithful to the commandments and the other is not - whether it's the husband or the wife. We still believe the faithful spouse will have the chance to go to heaven.

There is a lot to it - more than you want to know -but these are just some things I thought might interest you. Basically, what I see you asking is whether the church believes women are inferior to men as far as marriage and heaven. The answer is no. We believe the man needs the woman too.

 

[m00c0w]

Wouldn't that be obvious to everyone that was there?

:giggle:

 

[JusticeJunkie]

Until we can hear the context of the phrase "3 hole wonder", I don't agree that it is necessarily a derogatory term. What if he is saying, "Wow, you are an amazing lover, and I appreciate all of you."?
That is the problem with the written word - as sometimes happens in this blog. Nuances are not available, no facial expressions to read. I believe the written word alone is often misconstrued - especially if taken out of context.

 

[Candy_Pickletoes]

Nurse....in another thread I believe you made mention that the disallowed letter supposedly from TA was available to read in the Court Minutes linked on the first page. There are a LOT of minutes there, would you be able to direct me to the correct date, or even the correct month? If I'm mistaken about you having made that comment or that a copy of the letter exists, my apologies!

 

[CUCKOOHEAD]

that did it for me too. didn't she go to their big party they had in full view of everyone?

Is that the party seen by anyone walking by on the street. The party where Cheney Mason told the public what he really thought about us all with his f off finger salute? Such a classy gentleman.

 

[TotallyObsessed]

Wouldn't that be obvious to everyone that was there?

Depends on how deep the water was, I guess..:floorlaugh:

 

[Chester_from_THM]

I'm having flashbacks of Dr Sally Karioth. This should be funny. :looking for popcorn and popcorn bowl:

Q: "Have you been published in any journals?"
A: "Yes, in Reader's Digest."
Q: :holding back a snicker: "Have you been published in any professional journals?"

Thanks for this reminder, Pensfan! That witness was absolutely hilarious. Another one trying to use a trial as an infomercial, IMO. She might have thought about showing up sober though, I swear I thought she was inebriated the whole time.